EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[birchesgreen]

In answer to the question about the Euro MP elections, if A50 was extended until June then no- if it was extended beyond then yes, we would be sending a new batch of MEP's.

So we could be sending them to do six month's work, most over summer when the place is on holiday!! However if A50 is extended enough for that to happen, the chances are that we're remaining as the EU suggest we would need very good reason to extend - which would be an election or vote.

Anyhow, wonder if all the Brexiters who think the EU is undemocratic won't be bothered voting (irony at work)?

The UKIP MEPs will be glad to have the chance to hoover up a few more months expenses

 

[Groningen]

Blaiming Corbyn for this Brexit failure is like Donald Trump blaiming the Democrats for the shutdown. The Tories have a majority with the help of the DUP.

 

[nlogax]

Blaiming Corbyn for this Brexit failure is like Donald Trump blaiming the Democrats for the shutdown. The Tories have a majority with the help of the DUP.

There is collective fault and collective responsibility. I sometimes think we need a George Mitchell-like character, someone external to the situation to come in and get people talking and listening and find a way out of this impasse.

 

[jellybaby]

There is collective fault and collective responsibility.

That's not how UK FPTP, adversarial House of Commons politics works in any other situation.

 

[birchesgreen]

Blaiming Corbyn for this Brexit failure is like Donald Trump blaiming the Democrats for the shutdown. The Tories have a majority with the help of the DUP.

Sure and Trump is trying his best to blame them too, luckily it looks like its not working

 

[nlogax]

That's not how UK FPTP, adversarial House of Commons politics works in any other situation.

This is not just 'any other situation'. You may have noticed?

 

[HH]

Why is the default stance to insult people because they make a decision based on experience and heaven forbid some kind of moral compass ? There is a proportion of the electorate that do not vote. To change this, MPs must get their acts together. The country voted out so it should have been full steam ahead to get a good deal to get us out. Like it or not, that was the democratic result of the election and should have then been supported.

IF there wasn't a 'Brexit' or there was a 'Second Referendum' then I can fully understand how ANY voter could see that as a betrayal and make a choice not to vote in the future.

"Democratic result of the election"? Are you getting confused? Did you mean the Referendum, which, of course, you know was only advisory.

This country has a Parliamentary Democracy. That P word contains the clue to the fact that we are not fully Democratic. If we were we would have a system more akin to that used on 'X Factor'. There's no point in getting upset about the way the system has always worked.

However I must ask what relevant experience people have on voting in the referendum? Has anyone experienced a Brexit before? And what has a moral compass got to do with it? I have a moral compass and I judge it's not right to ruin the chances of our younger and future citizens because of some lies written on the side of a bus.

 

[jellybaby]

This is not just 'any other situation'.

But it is naive to think the entire system will suddenly change overnight. The LibDems got a massive amount of stick following their role as a junior member of a more collaborative government and that was far too recent for more cooperation without an overhaul of Westminster.

 

[nlogax]

But it is naive to think the entire system will suddenly change overnight. The LibDems got a massive amount of stick following their role as a junior member of a more collaborative government and that was far too recent for more cooperation without an overhaul of Westminster.

I completely agree that it won't change overnight, if at all. It's utterly frustrating to sit back and watch political allegiance and posturing win over any attempt at a collaborative approach at a time when that sort of fresh approach is most needed. It's a slow motion car crash and many in Westminster seem utterly content to let it happen.

 

[nidave]

Why is the default stance to insult people because they make a decision based on experience and heaven forbid some kind of moral compass ? There is a proportion of the electorate that do not vote. To change this, MPs must get their acts together. The country voted out so it should have been full steam ahead to get a good deal to get us out. Like it or not, that was the democratic result of the election and should have then been supported.

IF there wasn't a 'Brexit' or there was a 'Second Referendum' then I can fully understand how ANY voter could see that as a betrayal and make a choice not to vote in the future.

The problem is people were voting for diffrent things - The question on the ballot was poor as no one knew what "Leave the EU" meant - if they had of sorted that out first then we would not have been in this mess.
Leaving the EU to tou does not nessescarlally mean the same thing to someone else who voted leave. Thats the crux of the issue. No one has a clue what leave actully means.
This is why any 2nd refrendum (if its happening) to to be clear about what leave actully means to the UK.

 

[AlterEgo]

"Democratic result of the election"? Are you getting confused? Did you mean the Referendum, which, of course, you know was only advisory.

This country has a Parliamentary Democracy. That P word contains the clue to the fact that we are not fully Democratic. If we were we would have a system more akin to that used on 'X Factor'. There's no point in getting upset about the way the system has always worked.

However I must ask what relevant experience people have on voting in the referendum? Has anyone experienced a Brexit before? And what has a moral compass got to do with it? I have a moral compass and I judge it's not right to ruin the chances of our younger and future citizens because of some lies written on the side of a bus.

It’s one thing to explain why an opponent might be wrong, but it’s quite another to paint them as immoral.

Misled, misinformed, or incorrect people are not necessarily bad people.

Our civic discourse is fundamentally undermined by people who continue to paint others they disagree with as immoral, bad, or corrupt.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Leaving the EU to tou does not nessescarlally mean the same thing to someone else who voted leave. Thats the crux of the issue. No one has a clue what leave actully means.
This is why any 2nd refrendum (if its happening) to to be clear about what leave actully means to the UK.

And that is why I strongly believe in a second referendum, using a "run off" style voting system where you prioritise your preference in order.

The options should be:
May's deal
No deal
Remain
...as on the timescale we have no other option is feasible.

Then you eliminate which is lowest, and allocate the second-choice votes from people who voted first choice that one to the other two and there you have a result (basically avoiding unfairly splitting the "out" vote, and also allowing, for example, someone to say they would rather remain than leave on May's deal, or rather leave with no deal than May's deal, or whatever). Ideally it should be legally binding so they can't keep arguing and faffing about it. Furthermore all campaigning should be strictly prohibited, because the implications of each are already well known and it avoids dirty campaigns and lies.

 

[Cowley]

And that is why I strongly believe in a second referendum, using a "run off" style voting system where you prioritise your preference in order.

The options should be:
May's deal
No deal
Remain
...as on the timescale we have no other option is feasible.

Then you eliminate which is lowest, and allocate the second-choice votes from people who voted first choice that one to the other two and there you have a result (basically avoiding unfairly splitting the "out" vote, and also allowing, for example, someone to say they would rather remain than leave on May's deal, or rather leave with no deal than May's deal, or whatever). Ideally it should be legally binding so they can't keep arguing and faffing about it. Furthermore all campaigning should be strictly prohibited, because the implications of each are already well known and it avoids dirty campaigns and lies.

I know it probably sounds bonkers, but I've been wondering whether we should have an initial referendum to decide whether we actually have a Second Referendum on leaving?
It would at least partially get around the obstacles that seem to be blocking every way forward currently.
I'm prepared to be shot down on this and it's only a thought.

 

[Howardh]

I know it probably sounds bonkers, but I've been wondering whether we should have an initial referendum to decide whether we actually have a Second Referendum on leaving?
It would at least partially get around the obstacles that seem to be blocking every way forward currently.
I'm prepared to be shot down on this and it's only a thought.

What I think should happen is;
all the Brexit options go through Parliament and are voted on and at each stage the lowest score gets rejected
...so they would be voting on (roughly)
no deal,
May's deal
Canada+
Norway+ EFTA/EEA
and then when it gets to one Brexit option put that to the public with remain as the other option. Of course if the option Parliament comes up with is Norway + EEA/EFTA we will be so close to the EU (but no say) then would that be worth putting to the vote...just go ahead with it?

 

[HH]

It’s one thing to explain why an opponent might be wrong, but it’s quite another to paint them as immoral.

Misled, misinformed, or incorrect people are not necessarily bad people.

Our civic discourse is fundamentally undermined by people who continue to paint others they disagree with as immoral, bad, or corrupt.

Not sure why you're replying to me on this subject, it was Comutor who implied that only he had a moral compass. I was just responding with where my moral compass strongly points (oh, and why it points there).

 

[HH]

What I think should happen is;
all the Brexit options go through Parliament and are voted on and at each stage the lowest score gets rejected
...so they would be voting on (roughly)
no deal,
May's deal
Canada+
Norway+ EFTA/EEA
and then when it gets to one Brexit option put that to the public with remain as the other option. Of course if the option Parliament comes up with is Norway + EEA/EFTA we will be so close to the EU (but no say) then would that be worth putting to the vote...just go ahead with it?

That still will not get a solution that a majority is happy with, just one that the most people are least unhappy with. Given the strong divisions, it won't be accepted by a large portion of the country (exactly how large a portion nobody knows, because we have no idea what the non-voters think). As I said weeks ago, there is no solution to this mess, because most people are cogenitally unable to change their minds about something, once they have made a decision, whatever evidence they are presented with (hence the ridiculous conspiracy theories, flat-earth society, etc.).

I suspect we're going to end up like Cassandra in Troy - proved right, but wishing we weren't.

 

[birchesgreen]

Army reservists being called up eh. Was that on the side of a bus?

 

[Basher]

I see Blair is making his mouth go. Well he will only get a lot of peoples backs-up. I would not trust one word he say's. He has always wanted to be the head of the EU.
So Blair just crawl back under the stone please.

 

[Jonny]

However I must ask what relevant experience people have on voting in the referendum? Has anyone experienced a Brexit before? And what has a moral compass got to do with it? I have a moral compass and I judge it's not right to ruin the chances of our younger and future citizens because of some lies written on the side of a bus.

If they had any sense, they would know that they had very little future in Europe, and that the disbenefits outweigh the benefits, especially since we still keep the Common Travel Area.

 

[Jonny]

In fact, the attempted guilt tripping in using those too young to vote by remain really got my back up!

 

[birchesgreen]

In fact, the attempted guilt tripping in using those too young to vote by remain really got my back up!

Yes i agree with you on that (probably first thing we've agreed on lol)

It just comes across a bit patronising and smug.

 

[Giugiaro]

Currently we are a member through EU, but we would become a separate member. The rules are the same either way.

Thank you. I know the UK had joined the organization way before EU membership, but wasn't sure if the individual membership of WTO would be automatically restored.

What we lose out on is all the agreements above and beyond WTO rules that the EU have negotiated with other countries.
Some blithe Brexiteer MPs talk as those these can be agreed overnight (and are parroted by the masses);

Not only the time it takes to negotiate those agreements, but also passing them through parliament. If the EU Brexit Deal tells us anything, is that 3 years wouldn't be near enough to get a single trade deal, much less dozens of them, each with its own caveats.

But that's how politics work. You lie about the most crucial details, them try to get way with it when in office! ​

 

[superkev]

Not only the time it takes to negotiate those agreements, but also passing them through parliament. If the EU Brexit Deal tells us anything, is that 3 years wouldn't be near enough to get a single trade deal, much less dozens of them, each with its own caveats.
But that's how politics work. You lie about the most crucial details, them try to get way with it when in office! ​

I picked up a Sun in a cafe the other day and I couldnt believe how naive there editorial was advocating a hard brexit and "battering down the hatches" for a few months of disruption. A few months-unbelievable. Prob more like 5 to 10 plus years of austeritry while we go round begging for trade deals and try rebuild our industry.
Big disappointment to me was the original in out referendum where an option to renegotiate our membership was not available. Is this point still valid now. Just because pussycat Cameron couldnt extract anything from Junicker dosent mean someone with more spine (bring back Maggie) wouldnt come up with a better deal.
K

 

[birchesgreen]

The Sun eh, well...

https://pressgazette.co.uk/times-swings-into-black-as-suns-pre-tax-losses-triple/

The publisher of the Sun and the Sun on Sunday has more than tripled its pre-tax losses to £91.2m in 2018

 

[HH]

In fact, the attempted guilt tripping in using those too young to vote by remain really got my back up!

Actually my children weren't too young to vote. They voted Remain. You got your facts wrong - again.

 

[nidave]

I picked up a Sun in a cafe the other day and I couldnt believe how naive there editorial was advocating a hard brexit and "battering down the hatches" for a few months of disruption. A few months-unbelievable. Prob more like 5 to 10 plus years of austeritry while we go round begging for trade deals and try rebuild our industry.
Big disappointment to me was the original in out referendum where an option to renegotiate our membership was not available. Is this point still valid now. Just because pussycat Cameron couldnt extract anything from Junicker dosent mean someone with more spine (bring back Maggie) wouldnt come up with a better deal.
K

The same sun who print total rubbish about the EU then have to hide the corrections on the website like...

OUR 21 October headline “Brussels: UK’s 600,000 benefit tourists is no
problem” was not accurate.

There is no evidence of 600,000 “benefit tourists” in the UK. Neither has the
European Commission said this would be no problem.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/archives/news/297647/clarification-30/

AN article, ‘Vote for bargains’ (27 Feb) described the potential savings on a number of goods, if EU tariffs were removed after Brexit.

Unfortunately, we made our calculations on retail prices, when tariffs are actually applied when goods arrive in the UK.

For example, we said that savings on Nike Air Trainers would be £20.40, but savings would actually be closer to £7.50.

There were also mistakes in the calculations for individual items.

For example, saving on a £2 pack of butter was given as £1, but the tariff is about 42p per pack.

Savings on an LG flatscreen TV was given as £44, but there’s an EU free trade agreement with South Korea, so there is no tariff.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/uncategorized/5897269/clarification-vote-for-bargains/

After its been in print and no one really checks the clarifications section unless it spread via social media.

 

[maradona10]

I had a conversation with a family member today and I was surprised to hear that she had voted to leave initially, and felt that a second referendum would result in the same outcome?

I'd be inclined to think that after a close vote initially, and a few years of Brexit chaos, the outcome would most likely be to remain in the EU? Not to mention the demographic changing with more of the younger voters having their say (I don't think it's far fetched to say most of the young voters would want to remain)

Anyone else agree?

 

[Esker-pades]

I had a conversation with a family member today and I was surprised to hear that she had voted to leave initially, and felt that a second referendum would result in the same outcome?

I'd be inclined to think that after a close vote initially, and a few years of Brexit chaos, the outcome would most likely be to remain in the EU? Not to mention the demographic changing with more of the younger voters having their say (I don't think it's far fetched to say most of the young voters would want to remain)

Anyone else agree?

One has to remember the narrative that leading leave politicians continue to promote (sabotage by remainers, that no-deal isn't a disaster etc.) and how much influence it has on people who voted to leave. In order to get people to change their mind, they have to admit they were wrong in the first place.

One will also have people who voted remain who will vote leave either because they have been convinced that leaving is better than remaining, or they will vote on the principle that the original referendum was a vote to leave, and that should be respected.

The result of a second referendum is far from a foregone conclusion, and if there is one remain has to learn from the mistakes of the previous campaign. Remember, both Nigel Garage and Alastair Campbell have advocated for a second referendum. Assumptions is what got us in this mess in the first place.

 

[Cowley]

I had a conversation with a family member today and I was surprised to hear that she had voted to leave initially, and felt that a second referendum would result in the same outcome?

I'd be inclined to think that after a close vote initially, and a few years of Brexit chaos, the outcome would most likely be to remain in the EU? Not to mention the demographic changing with more of the younger voters having their say (I don't think it's far fetched to say most of the young voters would want to remain)

Anyone else agree?

It's an interesting one.
My uncle who is an extremely learned political junky (for example he's a writer and he went over to America to experience live the last election that Trump obviously won), is convinced that it would go 60/40 in the direction of Leave if there was another referendum. I can't see that myself, but who knows?
The Brits are quite liable to stand up against a perceived 'being pushed around' by Brussels if that's the particular echo chamber that they've been listening to.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

I had a conversation with a family member today and I was surprised to hear that she had voted to leave initially, and felt that a second referendum would result in the same outcome?

I'd be inclined to think that after a close vote initially, and a few years of Brexit chaos, the outcome would most likely be to remain in the EU? Not to mention the demographic changing with more of the younger voters having their say (I don't think it's far fetched to say most of the young voters would want to remain)

Anyone else agree?

Gawd… am actually starting to think that maybe we should have another vote... opposed as I am to the EU Soviet/Reich another vote will really only go one of two ways -
a narrow victory for remain prompting a best of three response from leave voters.. but much more likely will be a more emphatic leave vote... and then what ? more toys out of the pram from those opposed to democracy ?
...I do get it - we had years opposing Thatcher (on far less of a popular vote) but we had to cede to the will of the democratic vote. The alternative will lead us to the slippery slope of some form of dictatorship where "those who know better" will tell us how to live our lives.